Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution: In which I respond to the commenters.

Whither, indeed? A check on the show’s page on ABC’s web site provides a clue: it seems that the next episode, titled Maybe LA Was a Big Mistake, is scheduled to air on Friday, May 27. That’s right – the Friday before Memorial Day. More than five weeks after the last episode aired (April 19.) Which causes me to wonder, just who it is who thought up that title – JO, or ABC? (Note: Having your show put on hold after only two episodes doesn’t bode well; neither does having it switched to another time slot.)

Since the show is in what appears to be a month-plus long hiatus, there is no recap / review / snarky commentary to provide. So, what’s a blogger to do? In my case, I spent some time today re-reading the previous posts, as well as thecomments. I will say this about the commenters: you they are certainly opinionated! Passionately so, in fact. While I would have liked to respond to each and every one, I have learned that going through process to approve a comment, then compose a response, then approve that response, then lather, rinse, repeat… is less than optimal.* So, I thought I would address some of the overall themes presented in the comments here: if you don’t want to read them, you can just wait until May 27th (or so) and read my commentary on the upcoming (third) episode.

The tone of many of the comments I read indicate that folks are very supportive of JO’s goal (to improve the quality of food served in the public school system, particularly the LAUSD) – so supportive, in fact, that they feel this fact should excuse any faults he might exhibit in the actual execution of his plan to achieve that goal. By the same token, people feel the LAUSD is either (a) doing the best they can, and everyone (JO included) should leave them alone**, or (b) a bunch of nincompoops who are being schooled*** by JO.

There was also a theme that I went overboard with my criticism. That’s OK, I don’t expect everyone to “get” – or especially even to appreciate – my particular style of writing. I may rub some people the wrong way, while others may simply disagree with my point of view. Which is OK, since life would be incredibly boring if everyone agreed with every word I wrote. So, if you want to be a critic – knock yourselves out [metaphorically speaking].

Let’s look at JO, first. Because, I certainly took some flak for my opinions (and their tone****) of what JO was doing. How could I fail to see, much less appreciate, the gravity of the problem he is trying to fix?

Truth be told, I do understand the problem he is wanting to address. I fully appreciate the seriousness of the situation; about 6 years ago I too had offspring in the public schools, and I had my own beefs with how the public schools handle mealtime. And, I also appreciate the fact that Jamie has what he feels are possible solutions (especially since he also has the expertise to back those feelings up).

HOWEVER – of all the options he had for trying to get his ideas implemented, he chose what I consider to be one of the weakest. He could have chosen to approach the school board and work with the food service staff off-camera; he could have chosen to do a one (or even two) hour TV special documentary on his proposal, the implementation, and the outcome (possibly using a follow-up at six months); he could have chosen to work as a volunteer teacher in the culinary ed program; he could have even found a sponsor for, and put on, one of those “conferences” like the one he attended in the first episode! Instead, he chooses to create a series (a “season” as it were) of programs in a Reality TV/drama format. This tends to give an aura of “truthiness” to the show, as opposed to the truthfulness (notice the difference?) that one would expect to be conveyed if the program were a straight-up documentary. While the format will pretty much guarantee an audience (and the advertisers/sponsors that such programs depend on for their revenues), there are some trade-offs that have to be made. One of the things that will likely be sacrificed is an atmosphere of collaboration/cooperation with the school district(s) involved, because conflict is an essential dramatic element of the story. So, you end up with scenes like JO ripping into the cafeteria line staff in “Season 1″ (the previous season, filmed in West Virginia), which IMO took the focus off what he was trying to do (educate said staff), making him out to be somewhat of a bully. A bully with a funny accent. Given our somewhat xenophobic tendencies in the USofA these days, this probably wasn’t his smartest move.

And, what of the school district involved? They certainly aren’t coming out of this smelling like a rose (though it should be noted that the producers/editors work for JO, so they will likely tell the story from his point of view). Also, their Communications/Public Affairs office is either asleep at the helm, or just plain incompetent. I particularly love this quote from over at The Lunch Tray on the end of the last episode, which shows the size of the hole the LAUSD is going to have to dig itself out of:

Now, there are several reasons (other than the fact they are turning the next generation into a race of cannibals) for the LAUSD’s lack of cooperation:

Their job is to run a school system, and provide an education to their constituents (the children who are students in said school system.) Using their facilities, and their staff, to help make a Reality TV show is not (nor should it be) a priority activity.

Based on past history (and after watching Season 1), they may have realized that making them look good wasn’t in JO’s plan. I can pretty much assure you that this will put an instant damper on any enthusiasm that might have been felt for the project.

Some of the parents, upon learning that images of their children might be used for commercial purposes (because this TV series is a commercial endeavor, after all), may have raised a stink. A big enough stink that the school board had to back off of their plan. As I noted earlier, this show is producing some strong reactions (at both ends of the spectrum!) Having to deal with such reactions adds a whole ‘nuther layer of stress that the LAUSD probably doesn’t need right now (if ever).

(Speaking of strong reactions: we should remember that the city of Los Angeles has been known to suffer from episodes of mass anti-social behavior [read: riots] when passions are aroused: and while I don’t understand why an unjust action on the part of the local government employees should result in a mass sale [of the five-finger variety] on consumer electronics, adult beverages, and tobacco products – I guess it just shows how much – or how little – I know about life in the big city. But, I digress: it is possible that the LAUSD didn’t want to be at the epicenter of another one of those firestorms that periodically sweep through the city.)

It is also possible that the LAUSD’s lawyers started getting cold feet, and have advised the school board to distance themselves from JO and the show. Lawyers tend to be funny that way. Especially if***** they felt that JO was about to pull a fast one on the school district, or had somehow misled them as to his intentions during negotiations.

Or, it may just be that the board members are, in the words of The Bloggess, “total douche-canoes.”

One last observation on the LAUSD: reading reports on various blogs and news sites, it would appear that they offered JO several alternatives to the Reality TV show (work in the kitchen without the cameras, accept a challenge to improve the menu, given the same financial contraints the LAUSD operates under), and that he chose not to take them up on these offers. Why did JO decline, if his over-riding consideration was to improve the diet of the school children? On the other side of the coin, it also appears that the LAUSD is making some changes that, if not inspired by JO’s crusade, are at least consistent with his stated positions.

So, bottom line: do I support what JO is trying to accomplish? When it comes to his general goal of improving the nutritional value of the food consumed by the school children, absolutely. But I also understand that he has his own agenda in doing this, and part of that agenda involves self-promotion (though this is not necessarily a Bad Thing).

He is, at best, attacking some of the symptoms that he sees, and not addressing the root causes. Because it is much easier to address the symptoms, and if some symptoms prove to be resistant, well you can simply ignore them. Or, you can use them to make your adversary seem even more recalcitrant and eeevil. Which, again, makes for great dramatic TV shows, though it isn’t necessarily as effective in improving the quality of what the kiddoes stuff in their pie-holes.

Unfortunately, the problem he is trying to solve isn’t a simple one: there are many factors, some of which are outside of the control of the LAUSD (for example, the amount of money the feds will reimburse them under the school lunch program, or the amount of taxation the taxpayers are willing to put up with, or the different places that the money they take in has to be spent). We are seeing, at best, a tiny sliver of the pie. It would behoove us to keep this in mind as we watch the show. It would also behoove us to keep in mind that the purposes of the show are to entertain, to inform, and to call to action.****** And that the storytellers (the producers and editors) will use these purposes, and the conflicts that are engendered between the various participants, as a means to tell their story.

My Final Thought: it isn’t enough to have a pure heart, and a noble cause. Not only must one do the right thing, one must do the right thing the right way. At this time, while I agree (in a general sense) with what he is trying to accomplish, I do not think JO is always doing the right things, the right way. And, I will continue to call him out on it, as I see fit. Because, as the scorpion said after stinging the turtle, “it’s what I do.”

See you on (or after) May 27th!

* Though this has improved, tremendously, with the switchover to the new blogging software on chron.com.
** Admittedly, this represented a minority view. A very small minority view.
*** Pun totally intended.
**** Especially their tone.
***** A word which, in this context, means “what you are about to read is total speculation, with no facts to support an actual allegation.”
****** If you have any doubt about this, visit the show’s web page. The first thing you see? SIGN THE PETITION. AND BECOME A PART OF THE REVOLUTION. For realz.

One Response

This is author and columnist, David Lawrence Dewey. I have been writing about the dangers of hydrogenated oils, high fructose corn syrup, MSG, excess sugar in processed food and other toxins in the food supply since 1996. I was the first journalist to warn consumers about hydrogenated oils and aspartame, high fructose corn syrup, excess sugars in processed foods and other artificial sweeteners in 1996.

There is 4 teaspoons of high fructose corn syrup in one small carton of chocolate or strawberry flavored milk. And the problem is, the flavoring is artificial as well. And HFC is in nearly everything, especially processed foods.

First, high fructose corn syrup is NOT like sugar as the commercials want you to believe. I explain all that in my column. There are 4 teaspoons of HFC in one small carton of chocolate or strawberry flavored milk. And the other problem is, the flavoring is artificial as well. And HFC is in nearly everything, especially processed foods.

I have written an extensive article about this fiasco with the LAUSD school district and I show by actual school menu items, what is in the food the school district is serving and how deadly they are. One lunch item has over 1,400 MG of sodium. This has been kept from students, parents for too long. You can read it on my website at:

Also, check out the new documentary, inGREEDients, that I was
the content, creative and journalistic consultant on. Jaime Oliver
has picked it as one of his 7 favorite films. It has won (5) film awards.

If you are a reader of the The Lunch Tray, if you order the DVD and put my name DEWEY in the company field name, you will get (2) DVD’s of the documentary for the price of (1). You can then give the 2nd DVD to a family member as a gift to help spread the word about the dangers of hydrogenated oils and other toxins in the food supply.

If you are a student, I ask you to please read this article and the links to my other articles on the deadly toxins in processed food and how children as young as ten are developing diabetes, heart disease,learning problems because of poor diet. Email your friends about my article and if you have one of these diseases I would like to hear from you. You can contact me through my website.

Jaime Oliver is trying to save lives, just as I have since 1996, let him in the schools!